National Republican., 1887-10-20
THE ROGERS TELEPHONE BILL.
The Mislaid Papers Can be Duplicated
without Trouble.

the mislaid Papsrs Can Dc Duplcated
without Trouble.
The sensational statements concerning
the alleged loss Of the original papers in the
equity cause of J. Harris Rogers VS.. Attor-
ney General Garland and others have caused
considerable comment, and the true facts
in the case have appeared difficult to get at
Mr.. jeff Chandler makes the following
statement In regard to the matter. which
can be depended upon as reliable:
1t Is said by the clerk OF the court that the
original bill and exhibits are no, in his otiloe
he holds receipt signed by young man In
my office upon piece of paper whcn has no
title of any cause upon II, but, inasmuch as 1t
is in the place where the court papers ought to
be, II may fairly be presumed TO be receipt
for the Rogers bill, When aud for what reason
have had correct copy OF the bill ever since
was employed In the case. This, with ex-
hibits, are all the papers that ever had any
use for, and never, to the best OF my recolec-
ton did have the original papers In my
office or out OF the court room. Assuming,
however, that am mistaken, and that the re-
ceipt above mentioned was given for me, and
that the papers are not to be found, proposed
TO Mr.. Rogers's son, who called upon me for
the papers, that l would give him my exact
copy OF the bill and 60 with him to the court
original bill. He said this would not supply
The exhibits. l proposed that inasmuch as all
the exhibits were printed, copies satisfactory
to him might be by him filed and the exhibits
thereby be supplied. / find since seeing him
that, on Feb. 2, 1887, Mr.. Rogers himself had
prepared and filed In the supreme court of the
District Of Columbia printed copy of so
sary to the hearing of his case
OH appeal. The case was TO have been argued
last spring before the adjournment of the court
for the summer. All parties were ready for
argument. No complaint was made about loss
of papers, and attended the court for several
days, waiting for the case to come up in its
order. 1t was not, however, reached, and the
ing 1t. The printed record. filed in the appel.
late court by Mr.. Rogers, contains complete
and accurate copies of the exhibits which were
attached to the original bill. These, with the
copy of the original bill, which / have de-
posted with the clerk for the use of Mr.. Rogers,
should he require 1t, make the record abso.
lutely correct between Mr.. Rogers and my
clients. Mr.. Rogers's printed record contains,
however, all of Importance TO him In the orig.
there are several attorneys in the case, by ac-
cident. There is little difficulty, however,
generally In supplying them. | know abso-
lutely nothing OF the papers said to be missing.
never had In my possession, at any time or
place, the papers pu. in the case by Mr.. Gar
lands attorney.
The intimation given out that there is some
thing wrong In regard to these papers is with
out foundation. Lawyers do not steal papers.
yer wiilfully mislaid a court paper. They do
not engage in so detestable a business. Records
are sometimes lost as men lose other things.
but, when such is the case, they are supplied
by consent. This eau be done In this case with
out the slightest inconvenience to any one.